FY 2002 Mountain Snake proposal 199604300

Section 1. Administrative

Project location

Reasonable and Prudent Alternatives (RPAs)

Section 2. Past accomplishments

Section 3. Relationships to other projects

Section 4. Budget for Planning and Design phase

Task-based budget

Outyear objectives-based budget

Outyear budgets for Planning and Design phase

Section 5. Budget for Construction and Implementation phase

Task-based budget

Outyear objectives-based budget

Outyear budgets for Construction and Implementation phase

Section 6. Budget for Operations and Maintenance phase

Task-based budget

Outyear objectives-based budget

Outyear budgets for Operations and Maintenance phase

Section 7. Budget for Monitoring and Evaluation phase

Task-based budget

Outyear objectives-based budget

Outyear budgets for Monitoring and Evaluation phase

Section 8. Estimated budget summary

Itemized budget

Total estimated budget

Reason for change in estimated budget

Final design and Construction of artificial production facilities were originally scheduled for 2001. However, these actions were not funded in the 2001 budget process and did not take place in 2001. Therefore, they are included in the 2002 budget, resulting in an increase of $3,264,100 over the 2002 projected budget forecasts. Total number of PIT tags has increased over past years to include tagging needs of supplementation fish. In addition, the JCAPE project is adding two and three quarters (2.75) additional FTE's above FY 2001, (1) a biologist I to assist with database management, error checking of data and some assistance with reports, (2) a technician I to fully staff two person crews for safety and work load reasons, (3) additional administrative support. In FY 2001 we budgeted for a personnel fringe rate of 28% and for FY 2002 the fringe has increased to approx. 38%. These increases explain the increase from the outyear projections from the FY 2001 proposal.

Cost sharing

Reviews and recommendations

This information was not provided on the original proposals, but was generated during the review process.

Comment:

As initially planned, the Idaho Supplementation Study (ISS) was probably the best supplementation study among the Provinces. It should be continued, but the ISRP has a number of concerns that should be addressed while there is still time. This study addresses the critical issue of the efficacy of supplementation to restore populations and many resources have been committed to it. With the experimental design of the Yakima Hatchery in question (not wild/wild and no hatchery/hatchery controls), retaining the integrity of this experiment is crucial. It is important that the Idaho Supplementation Studies be completed following the original approved experimental design.

The most critical ISRP concerns are:

1. the effect of the loss of Johnson Creek (previously a control stream) from the experimental design, and
2. the effect of straying of hatchery fish into Lake Creek, the Secesh River, and other designated "controls".

As currently planned in project #199604300"Johnson Creek Artificial Propagation Enhancement Project", Johnson Creek is neither a treatment nor a control stream in the ISS because the criteria for stopping supplementation has been changed and does not appear to match the timetable in the ISS. Supplementation activities in Johnson Creek should cease immediately for the duration of the ISS study design, allowing Johnson Creek to continue to be use as a 'control' stream, even given the recent limited supplementation of it. (Note: a portion of the 2001 returning jacks are the first returning fish from the limited Johnson Creek supplementation effort.)

To do minimal damage to the ISS study design, the ISRP recommends that Johnson Creek now be considered a control stream (at least by year class!) and that supplementation be stopped in Johnson Creek in accordance with the original timetable in the ISS. The number of wild returning adults we observed earlier this month spawning in Johnson Creek, and the number we are likely to observe next year, argue that supplementation of Johnson Creek is not needed as an emergency action for a declining stock at least through the duration of the ISS experiment.

As we understand the situation, the decision to remove Johnson Creek from the study was beyond the control of some proponents of the ISS project. Nevertheless, we find it unacceptable that the experimental design for study of such a critical issue as supplementation would be compromised by a decision to remove a control stream from the study. The only conclusion we can come to is that the proponents of the decision to remove Johnson Creek from the supplementation study believe that they already know the result, i.e., they believe supplementation works! A broad base of the scientific community is in extreme disagreement with this conclusion, and it is unacceptable that the best-designed study of supplementation would be compromised.

Idaho Supplementation Studies

A response is needed for the set of Idaho Supplementation Study Projects.

Background

Supplementation of natural stocks is not a mandated mitigation objective, but has become an important part of the hatchery programs. Idaho has outplanted (i.e. off-site releases) over 5.5 million chinook fry, approximately 8 million smolts, and 8,000 adults into the Salmon River drainage since 1977 (IDFG et. Al. 1990). During the same period, over 17 million fry, 3 million smolts, and 2,000 adults were outplanted into the Clearwater River drainage (Nez Perce Tribe et. Al. 1990). In spite of widespread outplanting activities there has been little scientific evaluation of supplementation on rebuilding or influencing natural salmon populations both in Idaho and basin wide. Furthermore, despite these hatchery mitigation efforts, anadromous fish stocks in Idaho continued to decline.

The Idaho Department of Fish and Game (IDFG) spearheaded development of the Idaho Supplementation Studies (ISS) to address questions identified in the Supplementation Technical Work Group (STWG) Five Year Workplan (STWG 1988), as well as help define the potential role of supplementation in managing Idaho's anadromous fisheries and as a recovery tool for the basin. The goal of the Idaho Supplementation Studies is to evaluate various supplementation strategies for maintaining and rebuilding spring/summer chinook salmon populations in Idaho and to develop recommendations for using supplementation to rebuild naturally spawning populations.

Projects directly involved in the ISS are:

1. Project ID: 198909800. Idaho Supplementation Studies. Sponsor: Idaho Department of Fish and Game and Idaho Office of Species Conservation. Subbasin: Salmon.
2. Project ID: 198909801. Evaluate Supplementation Studies in Idaho Rivers (ISS). Sponsor: U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service - Idaho Fishery Resource Office. Subbasin: Clearwater.
3. Project ID: 198909802. Evaluate Salmon Supplementation Studies in Idaho Rivers- Nez Perce Tribe. Sponsor: Nez Perce Tribe. Subbasin: Salmon.
4. Project ID: 198909803. Salmon Supplementation Studies in Idaho- Shoshone-Bannock Tribes. Sponsor: Shoshone-Bannock Tribes. Subbasin: Salmon
5. Project ID: 199005500. Steelhead Supplementation Studies in Idaho Rivers. Sponsor: Idaho Department of Fish and Game and Idaho Office of Species Conservation. Subbasin: Clearwater
6. Project ID: 199604300. Johnson Creek Artificial Propagation Enhancement Project. Sponsor: Nez Perce Tribe. Subbasin: Salmon.

ISS also coordinates field activities and data collection efforts with the Idaho Habitat/ Natural Production Monitoring project (199107300). ISS also coordinates with and transfers data to projects in the Salmon River subbasin including the Monitoring Smolt Migration of Wild Snake River Spring/Summer Chinook Salmon (199102800), Salmon River Habitat Enhancement (9405000), and Salmon River Production Program (199705700). ISS also works closely with the Lower Snake River Compensation Plan (LSRCP) to coordinate on hatchery supplementation treatments and evaluations.

Presently, there are eleven state and federal anadromous hatcheries operating in Idaho: Clearwater, Oxbow, Rapid River, McCall, Sawtooth, Pahsimeroi, Dworshak, Kooskia, Hagerman National, Niagara Springs, and Magic Valley. There are also three satellite rearing ponds: Powell, Red River, and Crooked River operated in conjunction with the Clearwater Hatchery. These hatcheries have the combined capacity to produce 8.5 million spring chinook smolts, 2 million summer chinook smolts, 6.7 million A-run steelhead O. mykiss smolts, and 4 million B-run steelhead smolts annually.

ISS Study Design

The ISS study design called for a minimum of 15 years (three generations) of research (Bowles and Leitzinger 1991). Sampling was initiated in 1991, and implementation began in 1992. Supplementation effects are monitored and evaluated by comparing juvenile production and survival, fecundity, age structure, and genetic structure and variability in treatment and control streams of similar ecological parameters.

Due to the large geographic scope of this study, study streams were partitioned among four resource management entities for implementation. These include Idaho Department of Fish and Game, Nez Perce Tribe, Shoshone-Bannock Tribe, and the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service-Idaho Fishery Resource Office. Allocations were based on interest, integration with ongoing programs, cost efficiency, logistics and, to a lesser extent, relative equity. Approximately one-half of the study will be implemented by Idaho Department of Fish and Game through the ISS contract with BPA. The Nez Perce Tribe and Shoshone-Bannock Tribe have similar commitments to ISS, each comprising approximately 20% of the study. Both of these components rely heavily on integration of existing or proposed tribal programs. The U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service-Idaho Fishery Resource Office implements about ten percent of the project. The Idaho Department of Fish and Game is the lead agency regarding project development, coordination, and implementation.

The ISS Experimental Design was completed and published in 1991. Baseline data collection and development of supplementation brood stocks (Phase I) began in 1991. Over a period of about five years, supplementation brood stocks were developed for seven hatchery trap/release locations as identified in the experimental design:

Artificial Production Facilities

1. Sawtooth Fish Hatchery - Upper Salmon River
2. Pahsimeroi Fish Hatchery - Pahsimeroi River
3. McCall Fish Hatchery - South Fork Salmon River
Clearwater Fish Hatchery Satellites
4. Crooked River
5. Red River
6. Powell (Colt-killed Creek)
7. Clear Creek - Kooskia National Fish Hatchery

As adult fish began to return from the Phase I supplementation brood stock juvenile releases, the project progressed into Phase II. Phase II utilizes the returning adults to supplement natural origin recruits in treatment streams and maintains supplementation brood stocks for juvenile production and release. Juvenile fish releases through brood year 1996 include 1,281,755 fish in the Clearwater River basin and 1,954,048 fish in the Salmon River basin.

This project is now transitioning from Phase II to Phase III, monitoring the effects of supplementation. In Phase III juvenile releases from supplementation brood stocks are eventually terminated, returning adults from prior juvenile releases are released to supplement spawning of natural origin recruits, and monitoring of production and productivity response variables in control and treatment streams continues. In 2000, juvenile releases were maintained at levels similar to releases in 1999.

Treatment (e.g. supplementation in general, supplementation with a particular life stage, supplementation with a particular brood source) effects will be tested directly by hypotheses. In general, treatments will be applied for one to two generations (5-10 years) following approximately one generation of pretreatment data. Population responses to supplementation will be monitored a minimum of one generation (5 years) following supplementation. It is important that the original study design be maintained. Reducing sample size (number of treatment streams) can potentially impair the sensitivity of the design. Reducing to five treatment streams provides only a 60% chance of detecting a 25% change in production, whereas we would still have over 95% chance of detecting a 50% change.

Related projects

Several additional projects are related to the ISS. The monitoring and evaluation portion of the Johnson Creek Artificial Propagation Enhancement project (199604300) conducts the juvenile emigration and survival, adult escapement (weir and spawning ground surveys), and genetic monitoring associated with the ISS project in Johnson Creek. The Nez Perce Tribal Hatchery Monitoring and Evaluation project (198335003) collects the data associated with the ISS project in Lolo Creek, Eldorado Creek, and Newsome Creeks in the Clearwater River subbasin. The Nez Perce Tribe Monitoring of Listed Stock Chinook Salmon Escapement project (BPA Number 199703000) operates a video camera and weir to passively monitor and enumerate adults returning to Lake Creek and upper Secesh River. This project collects data on adult abundance and migration timing of chinook salmon.

ISRP Preliminary Recommendations:

As initially planned, the Idaho Supplementation Study (ISS) was probably the best supplementation study among the Provinces. It should be continued, but the ISRP has a number of concerns that should be addressed while there is still time. This study addresses the critical issue of the efficacy of supplementation to restore populations and many resources have been committed to it. With the experimental design of the Yakima Hatchery in question (no wild/wild and no hatchery/hatchery controls), retaining the integrity of this experiment is crucial. It is important that the Idaho Supplementation Studies be completed following the original approved experimental design.

The most critical ISRP concerns are:

1) the effect of the loss of Johnson Creek (previously a control stream) from the experimental design, and

2) the effect of straying of hatchery fish into Lake Creek, the Secesh River, and other designated "controls".

As currently planned in project #199604300"Johnson Creek Artificial Propagation Enhancement Project", Johnson Creek is neither a treatment nor a control stream in the ISS because the criteria for stopping supplementation has been changed and does not appear to match the timetable in the ISS. Supplementation activities in Johnson Creek should cease immediately for the duration of the ISS study design, allowing Johnson Creek to continue to be used as a 'control' stream, even given the recent limited supplementation of it. (Note: a portion of the 2001 returning jacks are the first returning fish from the limited Johnson Creek supplementation effort.)

To do minimal damage to the ISS study design, the ISRP recommends that Johnson Creek now be considered a control stream (at least by year class!) and that supplementation be stopped in Johnson Creek in accordance with the original timetable in the ISS. The number of wild returning adults we observed earlier this month spawning in Johnson Creek, and the number we are likely to observe next year, argue that supplementation of Johnson Creek is not needed as an emergency action for a declining stock at least through the duration of the ISS experiment.

As we understand the situation, the decision to remove Johnson Creek from the study was beyond the control of some proponents of the ISS project. Nevertheless, we find it unacceptable that the experimental design for study of such a critical issue as supplementation would be compromised by a decision to remove a control stream from the study. The only conclusion we can come to is that the proponents of the decision to remove Johnson Creek from the supplementation study believe that they already know the result, i.e., they believe supplementation works. A broad base of the scientific community is in extreme disagreement with this conclusion, and it is unacceptable that the best-designed study of supplementation would be compromised.

Other ISRP concerns: The proponents should list the initial control and treatment streams and the current treatments and controls. How has the overall design changed? What is the current timetable to stop supplementation in the treatment streams and to evaluate the effect on natural production? In the control streams, what effect do the straying rates have on the analysis? What would be the effect of changing Johnson Creek from a "control" to a "treatment" stream on the statistical power of the study?

The results of this project should help determine whether supplementation is a viable restoration strategy and as such should inform the RPA four-step safety net process.

There may be a need for ongoing input from an over-site committee with members outside those participating in the study to monitor the progress. Has this been planned for or considered?

Comment:

Comment:

Comments specific to this proposal are as follows:

Do not fund, except for the monitoring and evaluation portion needed to tie in with Idaho Supplementation Studies. Monitoring and evaluation should be funded at an appropriate level so that the Johnson Creek 'control' stream data continue to be integrated into the ISS experimental design. As initially planned, the Idaho Supplementation Study (ISS) was probably the best supplementation study among the Provinces. It should be continued. It is important that the Idaho Supplementation Studies be completed following a rigorous approved experimental design that is little changed from the original design.

The ISRP recommends that supplementation activities in Johnson Creek cease immediately at least for the duration of the ISS study design, allowing Johnson Creek to continue to be used as a 'control' stream, even given the recent limited supplementation of it. Johnson Creek was switched from a control stream to a treatment stream in 1996 on the basis of very low adult returns, the calculated high risk of local demographic risk of extinction, and severe underseeding of available habitat. Supplementation activities in Johnson Creek are planned for approximately 25 years. The proposal notes that adult carrying capacity for Johnson Creek is estimated at 1,681 summer chinook. While on the site tour this summer, we were told that 1,700 adult chinook returned to Johnson Creek this year. Thus, supplementation does not appear warranted in Johnson Creek at this time on the basis of low adult numbers and underseeding of available habitat at least through the duration of the ISS experiment.

In 2001, the first returning fish from the limited Johnson Creek supplementation effort (1998 - 2000) returned; however, we note that all returning hatchery-produced salmon were jacks and they constituted only a portion of the 2001 returning jacks. Next year (2002), two-ocean adults including products of the supplementation efforts will be returning to Johnson Creek. However, the Johnson Creek weir can be used to intercept returning adults, and allow passage only of wild naturally spawned chinook salmon into Johnson Creek. This will allow Johnson Creek to remain in the ISS study as a control stream. As currently planned in project #199604300, Johnson Creek is neither a treatment, nor a control stream in the ISS because the criteria for stopping supplementation has been changed and do not appear to match the timetable in the ISS.

Idaho Supplementation Studies

Background

Supplementation of natural stocks is not a mandated mitigation objective, but has become an important part of the hatchery programs. Idaho has outplanted (i.e. off-site releases) over 5.5 million chinook fry, approximately 8 million smolts, and 8,000 adults into the Salmon River drainage since 1977 (IDFG et. al. 1990). During the same period, over 17 million fry, 3 million smolts, and 2,000 adults were outplanted into the Clearwater River drainage (Nez Perce Tribe et. al. 1990). In spite of widespread outplanting activities there has been little scientific evaluation of the efficacy of supplementation on rebuilding or influencing natural salmon populations both in Idaho and basin wide. Furthermore, despite these hatchery mitigation efforts, anadromous fish stocks in Idaho continued to decline.

The Idaho Department of Fish and Game (IDFG) spearheaded development of the Idaho Supplementation Studies (ISS) to address questions identified in the Supplementation Technical Work Group (STWG) Five Year Workplan (STWG 1988), as well as help define the potential role of supplementation in managing Idaho's anadromous fisheries and as a recovery tool for the basin. The goal of the Idaho Supplementation Studies is to evaluate various supplementation strategies for maintaining and rebuilding spring/summer chinook salmon and steelhead populations in Idaho and to develop recommendations for using supplementation to rebuild naturally spawning populations.

Projects directly involved in the ISS are:

1. Project ID 198909800. Idaho Supplementation Studies. Sponsor: Idaho Department of Fish and Game and Idaho Office of Species Conservation. Subbasin: Salmon.
2. Project ID 198909801. Evaluate Supplementation Studies in Idaho Rivers (ISS). Sponsor: U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service - Idaho Fishery Resource Office. Subbasin: Clearwater.
3. Project ID 198909802. Evaluate Salmon Supplementation Studies in Idaho Rivers- Nez Perce Tribe. Sponsor: Nez Perce Tribe. Subbasin: Salmon.
4. Project ID 198909803. Salmon Supplementation Studies in Idaho- Shoshone-Bannock Tribes. Sponsor: Shoshone-Bannock Tribes. Subbasin: Salmon
5. Project ID 199005500. Steelhead Supplementation Studies in Idaho Rivers. Sponsor: Idaho Department of Fish and Game and Idaho Office of Species Conservation. Subbasin: Clearwater
6. Project ID 199604300. Johnson Creek Artificial Propagation Enhancement Project. Sponsor: Nez Perce Tribe Subbasin: Salmon.

Presently, there are eleven state and federal anadromous hatcheries operating in Idaho: Clearwater, Oxbow, Rapid River, McCall, Sawtooth, Pahsimeroi, Dworshak, Kooskia, Hagerman National, Niagara Springs, and Magic Valley. There are also three satellite rearing ponds: Powell, Red River, and Crooked River operated in conjunction with the Clearwater Hatchery. These hatcheries have the combined capacity to produce 8.5 million spring chinook smolts, 2 million summer chinook smolts, 6.7 million A-run steelhead O. mykiss smolts, and 4 million B-run steelhead smolts annually.

ISS Study Design

The ISS study design called for a minimum of 15 years (three generations) of research (Bowles and Leitzinger 1991). Sampling was initiated in 1991, and implementation began in 1992. Supplementation effects are monitored and evaluated by comparing juvenile production and survival, fecundity, age structure, and genetic structure and variability in treatment and control streams of similar ecological parameters.

Due to the large geographic scope of this study, study streams were partitioned among four resource management entities for implementation. These include Idaho Department of Fish and Game, Nez Perce Tribe, Shoshone-Bannock Tribe, and the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service-Idaho Fishery Resource Office. Allocations were based on interest, integration with ongoing programs, cost efficiency, logistics, and, to a lesser extent, relative equity. Approximately one-half of the study will be implemented by Idaho Department of Fish and Game through the ISS contract with BPA. The Nez Perce Tribe and Shoshone-Bannock Tribe have similar commitments to ISS, each comprising approximately 20% of the study. Both of these components rely heavily on integration of existing or proposed tribal programs. The U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service-Idaho Fishery Resource Office implements about ten percent of the project. The Idaho Department of Fish and Game is the lead agency regarding project development, coordination, and implementation.

The ISS Experimental Design was completed and published in 1991. Baseline data collection and development of supplementation brood stocks (Phase I) began in 1991. Over a period of about five years, supplementation brood stocks were developed for seven hatchery trap/release locations as identified in the experimental design:

Artificial Production Facilities

1. Sawtooth Fish Hatchery - Upper Salmon River
2. Pahsimeroi Fish Hatchery - Pahsimeroi River
3. McCall Fish Hatchery - South Fork Salmon River

Clearwater Fish Hatchery Satellites

4. Crooked River
5. Red River
6. Powell (Colt-killed Creek)
7. Clear Creek - Kooskia National Fish Hatchery

This project is now transitioning from Phase II to Phase III, monitoring the effects of supplementation. In Phase III juvenile releases from supplementation brood stocks are to be eventually terminated, returning adults from prior juvenile releases are released to supplement spawning of natural origin recruits, and monitoring of production and productivity response variables in control and treatment streams continues. In 2000, juvenile releases were maintained at levels similar to releases in 1999.

Treatment (e.g. supplementation in general, supplementation with a particular life stage, supplementation with a particular brood source) effects will be tested directly by hypotheses. In general, treatments will be applied for one to two generations (5-10 years) following approximately one generation of pretreatment data. Population responses to supplementation will be monitored a minimum of one generation (5 years) following supplementation. It is important that the original study design be maintained. Reducing sample size (number of treatment streams) can potentially impair the sensitivity of the design. Reducing to five treatment streams provides only a 60% chance of detecting a 25% change in production, whereas we would still have over 95% chance of detecting a 50% change.

Related projects

Several additional projects are related to the ISS. The monitoring and evaluation portion of the Johnson Creek Artificial Propagation Enhancement project (199604300) conducts the juvenile emigration and survival, adult escapement (weir and spawning ground surveys), and genetic monitoring associated with the ISS project in Johnson Creek. The Nez Perce Tribal Hatchery Monitoring and Evaluation project (198335003) collects the data associated with the ISS project in Lolo Creek, Eldorado Creek, and Newsome Creeks in the Clearwater River subbasin. The Nez Perce Tribe Monitoring of Listed Stock Chinook Salmon Escapement project (BPA Number 199703000) operates a video camera and weir to passively monitor and enumerate adults returning to Lake Creek and upper Secesh River. This project collects data on adult abundance and migration timing of chinook salmon.

ISRP Final Recommendation:

Not fundable until the ISRP concerns are adequately addressed. The experimental design has not been adhered to over the years and from the response to our preliminary review, the ISRP is not confident it will be in the future. In fact, the current experimental design is not adequately defined. There does not appear to be commitment to treatment durations, particularly to the Phase III portion of the study design, where supplementation ceases, so that treatment effects can be analyzed.

From communications that occurred during the ISRP site visit, it appears the project sponsors should be able to specify timelines for termination of the treatments for each treatment stream. A table needs to be developed for Phase III implementation that describes when the treatments will stop on a stream-by-stream basis. In the past, sponsors have not stuck with agreed upon control streams. How confounded are the treatment and control streams? This points to the need for submittal of a certified statistical design.

Projects 198909800 through 198909803 and 199005500 are fundable after adequately addressing the following constraints.

1. A written protocol for complete statistical analysis, certified by an independent statistician team should be presented to Council during the contracting period. The ISRP is not comfortable with the implications that "problems" with the study design can be "fixed" during the statistical analysis stage. Considerable thought and effort should be placed in planning the statistical analyses of these potentially controversial data before final decisions are made on criteria for stopping supplementation and before data are available.
2. The protocol for statistical analysis must indicate how straying of hatchery fish into "control streams" and "partial treatments" will be analyzed. For example, the response to the ISRP preliminary review indicated that the straying rate of hatchery fish into the Secesh River from 1996-2001 varied from 0.83% to 14.71%. This is in fact, de facto supplementation. It is unclear to the ISRP how partial treatment and de facto supplementation of control streams will be addressed in the statistical analysis of the ISS.
3. Development of a specific stream-by-stream protocol and timetable for implementation of Phase III of the ISS. Included in this is the immediate cessation of supplementation activities in Johnson Creek (see comments below on proposal 199604300) and inclusion of Johnson Creek once again as a control stream in the ISS experimental design.

Comment:

Comments
Johnson Creek received NMFS support in 1996 as a "high priority". The proposal has evolved into a moderately large and fairly expensive production program of 315,000 smolts, with components of NATURES rearing included. An HGMP needs to be completed. A special use permit for the permanent weir, holding ponds and NATURES final rearing/acclimation pond needs to be received from USFS.

Already ESA Req? No

Biop? No

Comment:

BPA RPA RPM:
--

NMFS RPA/USFWS RPM:
base

Comment:

Council recommendation: The ISRP provided this project a "Do not fund" recommendation (except for the monitoring and evaluation portion needed to tie in with Idaho Supplementation Studies (ISS)). The ISRP comments focus on the role of the Johnson Creek within the ISS study. Specifically, the ISRP notes that Johnson Creek was originally a control stream within the supplementation study, and that the past and proposed supplementation activities in this proposal are not consistent with the original ISS study design. The ISRP would have Johnson Creek supplementation activities halted so that the stream may continue to be used as a control stream within the larger ISS study.

Bonneville rated the projects as fundable (A, conditional). BPA recommends funding only HGMP development, base level M&E program, and other planning actions called for under the Council's approved three-step review process for artificial production facilities. However, BPA notes that Johnson Creek is not a control stream within the ISS. Reference is made to the emergency action to address declining adult salmon returns to Johnson Creek and that ISS cooperators (USFWS, NPT, SBT, IDFG) agreed to change Johnson Creek from a control stream to a treatment stream following the determination to begin an emergency supplementation action in Johnson Creek.

The Council's own past funding decisions endorsed the managers' changed strategy for Johnson Creek from a control stream to a supplemented stream. In 1996, the Council approved 15 high priority supplementation projects under Program Measure 7.3B. This was one of those projects. On June 30, 1998 the Council recommended funding, as an emergency measure, the Johnson Creek Artificial Propagation Enhancement Project to collect summer chinook salmon adults and rear juveniles. The most recent Council action on the Johnson Creek Artificial Propagation Enhancement Project was its FY 2001 funding recommendations. The Council considered and approved detailed project elements and associated budgets for the artificial production activities.

NMFS considers the project as a BASE project for Biological Opinion implementation and recognizes that this project was supported as a high priority supplementation project in 1996, but notes that the project has evolved into a moderately large and fairly expensive production program. NMFS recommends that an HGMP needs to be completed, and a special use permit for the permanent weir, holding ponds and acclimation pond needs to be received from USFS.

The Council is recommending that this project be funded at levels consistent with past Council decisions in Fiscal Year 1998 and Fiscal Year 2001. The ISRP's recommendation not to fund the project because of impacts to the original study design of the Idaho Supplementation Studies cannot be strictly accepted without further information gathering, as the project cooperators, NMFS, and the Council have consciously decided to take a different course with regard to supplementation within Johnson Creek than was originally conceived in the Idaho Supplementation Study. This Council recommendation to fund this project is subject to four conditions:

Condition One: The Council recommends that the sponsor be required to address how Johnson Creek will be used in the continuing Idaho Supplementation Studies as discussed in Salmon Issue 7 above. While past and current management and policy decisions to supplement Johnson Creek populations may have impacted the original study design, the sponsors should explore and provide explanations and alternatives that show how Johnson Creek can continue to be a part of the larger supplementation experiment. The sponsor should address the three questions in the ISRP final report on page 45. As part of that response, the sponsor should clearly identify how the past and proposed supplementation activities may diminish the quality or quantity of information that would be gathered in the larger ISS project. The Council recommends that this information be provided to the ISRP for review and a report back to the Council and sponsor before funding is committed.

Condition Two: The Council recommends that the JCAPE cooperators (Nez Perce, IDFG; USFWS, Shoshone Bannock) need to specifically detail how they agreed to move Johnson Creek from a control stream in the ISS study to one that is supplemented. This confirmation must include: (1) the understanding of the cooperators in 1996 regarding the use of this stream in the ISS study design; and (2) any agreements reached at that time regarding the magnitude of the Johnson Creek supplementation program, and any current agreement about the magnitude of the program currently underway. This information needs to be provided to the Council prior to the step two submittal.

Condition Three: The Council was very specific during its deliberation and approval of the Johnson Creek project in its Fiscal Year 2001 work plan. Those specifics were provided to ensure that the project maintained its approved scope and intent. Council has aligned the proposed budgets in this recommendation to reflect previous Council decisions and future step reviews. The Council wants to make clear that future budgets depend upon favorable Council decisions at each of those future reviews. The Council also strongly recommends that the sponsors be put on notice that the future step submittals must addresses the conditions placed on this project since the emergency action taken by the Council in 1998 and FY 2001 as outlined in a memo to BPA and sponsors on March 27, 2001. This includes the following conditions.

Conditions, as outlined, were placed on the project as part of the partial step two review approved by the Council on June 30, 1998.*

• relationship of this project to the Councils polices on artificial/natural production,
• final design of the project consistent with any master plan and preliminary design,
• has the project or its purpose changed in such a way to raise new scientific concerns,
• has the underlying science or the way it is understood changed so as to raise new scientific issues, and
• how technically appropriate are the monitoring and evaluation elements of the project.

Conditions placed on the project as part of the FY 2001 budget.

• The final cost of facilities are consistent to the cost presented in the FY 2001 project proposal and revised per the above request (i.e. Total $2,867,562 - Section 3, objective 1 - 5 at $384,171 and Section 4, objective 1 - 2 at $2,483,391) and any cost increases are fully justified and are associated with the selected alternative for the additional water supply.
• The development of an agreement with the USFWS and IDFG addressing proposed McCall Fish Hatchery modifications and additions, cost sharing, and facility management. This agreement needs to be presented as a part of the step two submittal.
• The ability to secure water rights (i.e. dependent of the selected alternative) and effluent permitting being addressed and presented as part of the step two submittal.
Condition Four: The Council anticipates that the step-two documents will be submitted to the Council on October 1, 2002. If this date is not met due to unforeseeable circumstances, the Council suggests that the sponsor be required to provide an explanation in writing addressing the reasons for the delay and provide a date certain that the documents will be provided. *There were eight responses that the reviewers noted that the information was inadequate (responses 4, 12, 25, 26, 27, 29, 30, and 31). As the Nez Perce Tribe's Project staff complete the monitoring and evaluation plan, preliminary design for the juvenile acclimation and release facilities, and the NEPA documentation, these questions will be more fully addresses (A Review of Response to Questions for the Partial Step 2 Review of the Johnson Creek Artificial Propagation Enhancement Project, Pacific Northwest National Laboratory Ecology Group, Richland, Washington, May 29, 1998)

---

REVIEW:
BPA Funding Decision
Recommendation:
Fund
Date:
Jun 13, 2002

Comment:

"Fund only HGMP development, base level M&E program, and other planning actions called for under the Council's approved three step process for artificial production facilities."

---

REVIEW:
ISRP Review (ISRP 2003-8)
Recommendation:

Date:
May 22, 2003

Comment:

[See full document for review of all Idaho Supplementation Studies (ISS) Projects]

---

REVIEW:
NWPPC Funding Recommendation
Recommendation:
Fund
Date:
Sep 20, 2003

Comment:

On track. Need to discuss future direction of this project (NPT, BPA & Council). Shifting from Capital to O&M. Issues with NMFS. 04 = O&M and M&E, no construction included.

---

REVIEW:
Project Sponsor Request for FY04-05
Recommendation:

Date:
Sep 20, 2003

Comment:

The JCAPE project was funded in 2003 at $921,456 (O&M $534,332, M&E $387,124). This funded amount consisted of applying a $94,500 Contract balance from 2002 and PIT tag costs of $55,125 to the amount of money to be received from BPA. After PIT tag costs ($55,125) and the 2002 Contract balance ($94,500) are subtracted, the JCAPE project received $771,831 for 2003 from BPA. This value is higher than the 2003 obligated value of $762,079 provided by the NPPC. This represents a difference of $9,752 or 1.3%. The 2004 JCAPE budget recommendation from NPPC is $923,887. The JCAPE budget as determined by the sponsor meets that amount of $923,887 (O&M $517,783, M&E $406,104). This amount includes $55,125 for PIT tags, no training, required travel, and no computer or computer software costs. The 2005 budget is $955,299 (O&M $535,387 and M&E $419,912) and this number represents a 3.4% increase over the 2004 approved budget number.

---

REVIEW:
NW Power and Conservation Council's FY 2006 Project Funding Review
Funding category:
expense
Date:
May 2005

FY05 NPCC start of year:	FY06 NPCC staff preliminary:	FY06 NPCC July draft start of year:
$923,887	$923,887	$923,887

Sponsor comments: See comment at Council's website